 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Rosales-Rosario v. Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center11/17/2003
a jury could reasonably infer would not occur in the absence of negligence (see Babits v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., supra at 671; see also Dillon v. Rockaway Beach Hosp., 284 NY 176; Hill v. Highland Hosp., supra). Further, any potential cause of the burn was within the exclusive control of the defendants (Babits v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., supra; Hill v. Highland Hosp., supra). Moreover, because the defendants together exercised concurrent control over the examination room, the medical procedures, and the equipment used to perform them, the application of the doctrine is not defeated solely because the injured plaintiff, who was under the effects of various medications, could not identify the person who caused her injury (see Schmidt v. Buffalo Gen. Hosp., 278 AD2d 827; Fogal v. Genesee Hosp., supra at 474-475; Matlick v Long Is. Jewish Hosp., 25 AD2d 538, 539). The defendants adduced no evidence in admissible form that contradicted the injured plaintiff's deposition testimony that she was unconscious at the time of injury, and thus could not have contributed to its cause (see Babits v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., supra). Accordingly, the defendants' motions should have been denied.
KRAUSMAN, J.P., McGINITY, COZIER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.
|